Theos-Talk Archives (March 2002 Message tt00117)

--- In theos-talk@y..., "bri_mue" <bri_mue@y...> wrote:
> How do you know your "believe," Roerich is really
> "channeling" something like "Morya" or just "believe" this
> because the name sounds similar to what Blavatsky named what she 
> tought she was dealing with, it must be that same "Morya" ?

First of all, did I ever say I believed Morya of Roerich and Morya of 
Blavatsky were one and the same person? That's making some 
remarkable assumptions on your part. Is this how you approach your 
work regarding the history of Theosophy? With assumptions?

Let me clarify your assumptions. I simply enjoy learning about 
Theosophy and Agni Yoga. I could care less who said what. 
Personally, I have no desire to convince people of the validity of 
the existence of Masters. Either they know or they don't know.

> If not just self-delusion, can you pls bring specific quotes
> compairing the writing style of the two versions of "Morya" showing
> it is the same as Blavatsky's.

> And concrete evidence that this was not just Roerichs fantasy, 
> subcounsciouly imitating the notion "Morya".

Wow, another assumption regarding my mental state. If I could do 
that, it would mean that I claim to have an Atma-Buddhi-Manas type of 
consciousness.

Well, I'm not falling for that catch-22. I would never claim to have 
the ability to access akasha on the different layers of the seven 
planes and bring it down to the physical plane so the materialistic 
mind can understand it. If one expects concrete evidence, it would 
be difficult to explain to those who are trapped in maya, glamor and 
illusion. That goes for pro or con.

Aren't you the one indulging in wishful thinking believing that there 
will ever be concrete evidence of who said what? In the end, it's 
still a matter of "he said, she said" or in our case, "Brigitte said, 
Monica said."

> What evidence is there apart from a presumed claim by you 
> regarding "intuition" reg. which there is no, indication it could
> not be simple just disguised intellectual-emotional preferrence of
> yours?

True intuition is not on the astral or emotional plane.

Rather than being overly emotional about your research, it would 
behoove you to learn how to take constructive feedback because the 
methods you are using for your historical research are mediocre if it 
is continuously based on the assumptions of what others think. The 
truth is never found that way.

MNS